Yes! It’s Rape!

Feminism directly confronts the idea that one person or set of people has the right to impose definitions of reality on others.  – Liz Stanley and Sue Wise
I got a call the other day from my friend, RJ Evans, who hosts American Heathen Radio, of which I am one of the co-hosts. He told me he was making a video about all the misogynist bullshit that has escalated and continues to escalate within Republican politics. Knowing RJ as I do, I was fairly confident that his video would be one that everyone should watch – complete with his special brand of sarcasm, wit and acerbic disregard for the sacred.

I was not disappointed. So, I ask you to take about ten minutes out of your day, if you would, to watch and listen as RJ Evans skewers those misogynist malcontent men as only RJ Evans can.

Without Further Ado…

If you’re around on Saturday nights, tune into American Heathen Radio on ShockNet Radio from 8pm to 11pm (EST) for a good time, great commentary, hilarious skits, insightful features and an American heathen perspective on news and events.

  21 comments for “Yes! It’s Rape!

  1. February 21, 2012 at 5:35 pm

    Awesome video. Wasn’t aware of this radio show. Will definitely have to tune in. Any chance he does a podcast?

    • Al Stefanelli
      February 21, 2012 at 5:41 pm

      Yeah, he does. There are links to the show’s website, where you can find the podcasts.

  2. Norman Lycan
    February 21, 2012 at 10:14 pm

    Hi Al,

    I wondered if it ever occurred to you that if you absolutely deleted religion from this planet, that the human issue would still not be resolved. Races and tribes would still hate each other. The rich would still be driven to exploit the masses. Megalomaniacs would still want to own the planet. Politicians would still manipulate and lie. You think you are planning “huge”, and it will probably cost that much. But, you are accomplishing baby steps. Pull the ten commandments out of a courthouse, take a prayer plaque out of a school, these are really positive things. But even atheists don’t get it yet. Number one: The first amendment only guaratees that there will never be a “state religion”, not that religion or it’s influences would be filtered out. And anyone who calls upon the founding fathers as some sort of freethinkers wasn’t in class when they studied the “Civil War” or the “Civil Rights Movement”. So let’s get real, shall we? Freethinking Agnostics will never wholeheartedly join your crusade, mostly because you treat us like limp spined idiots, unwilling to take that final plunge into secular anti-religion. We do that because we are devoted to freethought, and refuse to believe anything unproven by science, including a theory that the universe is an accident. Atheists are free to conduct their public campaign as they wish, but when the numbers don’t show up at your rallies, or back your initiatives, it’s because, again, you fucked yourselves. You cannot defeat religion by creating a new one. NL

    • Happiestsadist
      February 21, 2012 at 10:35 pm

      Well, that certainly explains why more and more people are identifying as atheists, these days, and why the fundies are actually starting to get scared. Guess what, dude? It’s not because of y’all.

      Also, atheists have never claimed that all human issues will be resolved by ending religion. So, uh, nice straw man you’ve got there.

      That’s some mighty fancy way of saying you want to pretend you’re capable of skeptical thought but you still wanna play pretend.

      I love the “waaaaah, atheism is a religion!” whine at the end. It shows that you don’t understand either, but are very, very invested in feeling unjustifiably smug about both.

      • Norman Lycan
        February 22, 2012 at 8:52 pm

        Actually, I do understand religion first hand. I was raised a JW, and when I was fed up, I lost my children because I was embroiled in an internal debate, about whether I saw the truth, or if I was really evil. If it was better to let my children be herded to the afterlife by my ex and my family, or fight for my rights. So your unfounded accusation is not only inappropriate, but personally insulting. But, it’s okay, because your comment indicates that you are a turd, and I forgive your disability.

        I also understand freethought. It is the rejection of all social norms, especially religion, customs, and tradition. The mistake that atheists make is an assumption that if religion is bullshit, the opposit must be true. That’s bad science. You can assume that the universe is an accident without any scientific evidence to support it, but what really makes you irrelevent is that you can’t see that the end of religion has nothing to do with end of human suffering. Just a wake up call.

        NL

        • Norman Lycan
          February 22, 2012 at 9:07 pm

          Reprise: The end of religion would be a welcome event, but it will not be the solution to the human condition.

        • John Morales
          February 22, 2012 at 9:20 pm

          [OT]

          I also understand freethought. It is the rejection of all social norms, especially religion, customs, and tradition.

          I do not think you understand the term freethought.

          Freethought is a philosophical viewpoint that holds opinions should be formed on the basis of science, logic, and reason, and should not be influenced by authority, tradition, or other dogmas. The cognitive application of freethought is known as “freethinking,” and practitioners of freethought are known as “freethinkers.”

          • Norman Lycan
            February 22, 2012 at 10:50 pm

            Uh duh!!! You changed my words, but the idea remains the same. Now, how do you defend atheism if it assumes that the universe is an accident, since the process of SCIENCE which proposes a theory, then sets up a series of tests to either prove or disprove a theory, then draws a conclusion based upon those tests. The idea that the universe is an accident has less intuitive reason behind it than the fraud of creation. Why, because one has to assume that accident or origin includes a function where life spontaneously generates where conditions allow. I would be the last to say that involves a god, but I will be first to say you are no scientist, even if you imagine yourself to be.

            Do you want to believe in the, “Big Bang”? Okay, what is the difference between a fundy believing a god created the world to worship his greatness, or an atheist who believes everything blasted into existence out of nothing. Polar idiots. The only right answer to the question is “I DON”T KNOW”. But, go ahead imagining yourself freethinkers, but there are things that cannot be known at this point in science, and if you dumbshits want to make a war out of it, you are not scientists and you are not freethinkers. But, that’s just my opinion.

            NL

          • John Morales
            February 22, 2012 at 11:36 pm

            Totally out of topic, of course, and perhaps Al will tell me to back off, but:

            since the process of SCIENCE which proposes a theory, then sets up a series of tests to either prove or disprove a theory, then draws a conclusion based upon those tests

            You confuse a hypothesis with a theory.

            (I can see you have difficulty grokking polysemy)

          • Timberwoof
            February 23, 2012 at 3:21 pm

            Norman, the origin of the universe is a genuine mystery. That means that the scientific method doesn’t yet have an explanation. But it does have a very good track record—far better than religious alternatives. Saying that God did it is no explanation at all; it just adds more mysteries: where did God come from, what’s he like, what techniques did he use to make the universe, and where exactly was he when he made it?

            Supposing that one’s own tribal god is the one that made the universe and that the other tribal gods didn’t do it and don’t exist seems to be kind of silly and one of main reasons to conclude that there aren’t any gods at all.

            The straw-man that eliminating religion will not solve the problems you listed is a particularly stupid one because it’s clear that religions haven’t solved the problem. Indeed, they contributed to it! It’s also foolish because most atheists don’t actually want to eliminate religion: that can’t be done while maintaining freedom of thought.

            Crusade? What crusade?

            So you’ve tried to poke holes in your version of atheism … what do you actually believe?

        • February 23, 2012 at 12:14 am

          You keep saying that science assumes the universe is an accident. That’s just not a correct description of the situation. Science admits freely that it has no comprehensive explanation for the existence of the universe. No evidence exists that could be used to validate any hypothesis about how the universe was created. If you grant the existence of matter and energy associated with the first fraction of a second after the Big Bang (the Big Bang is a notion very much consistent with existing cosmological evidence – not an assumption!), then the evolution of our universe from that instant just after the Big Bang is consistent with known physical principles. Quite unlike religions, science admits freely that it can’t explain everything and never “proves” anything in an absolute sense. Hence, your catch phrase is simply not true.

    • John Morales
      February 22, 2012 at 7:04 am

      It seems that, much like a vuvuzela, you only have one note to toot.

      (This post is about women’s rights and politics)

  3. Cynthia
    February 22, 2012 at 12:41 am

    I love you, RJ!

  4. Stacy
    February 22, 2012 at 3:54 pm

    I wondered if it ever occurred to you that if you absolutely deleted religion from this planet, that the human issue would still not be resolved….

    Well, I can’t speak for Al, but as for me and every single other atheist I know…

    Yes. Yes, it has.

    I’d ask “What’s your point?”, but, judging from your post, I’ve no reasonable expectation of hearing anything interesting, so I’m not interested.

    And, as John Morales points out, you’re off topic.

    • Norman Lycan
      February 22, 2012 at 8:12 pm

      Okay, here’s my point. That the grand Russian revolution of Marx, Stalin, and Lennon, which sought to delete religion from society and politics, FAILED!!!!!, not because they were not on the right track, but, they were consciously ignorant of the unintended consequences. They are now remembered in history as brutal tyrannical dictators. Would you now like government to outlaw religion? On the surface it seems like a miracle outcome, but, what if the government also declared atheism a religion, as I do? Backfire!!!!!!! You so called freethinkers, do not seem to understand that for every thrust forward there are unintended consequences. A great example, in the 1960’s LA had an orange sunset every day, but it wasn’t weather formations, it was pollution drifting out over the ocean. Now, they have brought the problem under control, but, what are the unintended consequences? Businesses have moved their manufacturing plants to China where you can belch their filth into the sky and dump their industrial waste into the ground water. And that’s why we are unemployed. But, you people think that if we just stifle religion, humanity will enter a new era of bliss. BULLSHIT!!!!!!!! I do believe in your cause, but, you people are obsessive compulsive and unconnected with the big picture. The human condition is much bigger than religion, and the solutions are not found at book burnings.

      NL

      • John Morales
        February 22, 2012 at 8:19 pm

        How does this relate to Republican politics in regard to women’s bodily autonomy?

      • yup, that guy they call a Jesus freak
        February 27, 2012 at 1:28 pm

        NL,

        I completely agree with most of what you said, ill just quickly comment.

        “I do believe in your cause, but, you people are obsessive compulsive and unconnected with the big picture.”

        Thats a very general statement thats tantamount to calling all atheists obsessive compulsive and unconnected with the big picture. I would agree there are some atheists who are like Stalin trying to eradicate anything associating itself with religion, but thats not every atheist.

        1.) If you meant that statement, as in the people on here, i would say thats unjustified, because your presuming to know their intentions and their character and you cant truly know someones character or being unless you get to know them.

        2.) If you meant it general thats just plain racist. My bests friends in the world, who i would die for, are atheists and they are some of the best people i know. They put to shame the majority of the supposed Christians in my area. Not all atheists are like that, though i dont deny some of them are like that.

        So just chill out homie.

        I think the best part of your response was, “…if we just stifle religion, humanity will enter a new era of bliss. BULLSHIT!!!!!!!!”

        Me —> “YESSSSSSSSSSS” *insert laugh and clap*

  5. Stacy
    February 22, 2012 at 4:05 pm

    Oh man, loved that. RJ has a new fan here.

  6. JJ7212
    February 22, 2012 at 9:58 pm

    Well, Norman might be off topic a bit and we might not agree with him, but at least he’s thinking about something! That’s a start… Oh well.

    I don’t want religion outlawed. I want people to THINK about it just like I hope that people THINK about Republican politics and how abusing women is just plain wrong. My wife is my best friend and we’re both a bit bossy sometimes. I would never try to control her verbally or physically because I wouldn’t want her to do that to me. It’s such a simple concept, but so many people can’t even grasp the healthy reality of it. Heck, I’m 6 foot 4 and she’s a 5 foot something Japanese girl! lol She’s my 5 foot of fury and I totally respect her for being confident, loving, and honest. We hardly ever talk about politics because here in Japan, nobody understands politics! …on the lighter side of things. lol

  7. February 23, 2012 at 12:29 am

    Seems to me that NL is on some personal crusade of his own – a war on atheists. In the process, he falls back on a set of stereotypes about atheists, as if all of us buy into the odd strawmen he’s created. Resorting to ad hominem insults doesn’t match my idea of a logical argument, but … he’s certainly free to think whatever he wants about us.

    RJ has a unique way of saying things, but what he says usually hits the nail on the head! It seems to me that virtually all of this political misogyny has its roots in the agenda of the religious reich. These folks are the ones who are seeking to deny the liberties of others in what certainly appears to be a campaign to transform the USA from a secular, diverse society into a theocracy.

    I encourage those who haven’t heard the “American Heathen” show to tune in on Saturday nights 7-10 pm Central time, 8-11 Eastern. It’s a bit crazy at times, but it has a healthy dose of serious content. The craziness keeps the show from being TOO serious, though!

  8. David Marjanović
    February 27, 2012 at 12:40 pm

    The idea that the universe is an accident has less intuitive reason behind it than the fraud of creation.

    Who cares about intuitive reason? Common sense misleads all the time when it comes to things we aren’t used to. Check out this and this

    …and then consider the empirical fact that the total mass of the universe seems to equal its total potential energy. (The error bars on the estimates of both are considerable, but even so they’re suspiciously close to each other.) If you count potential energy as negative, the total energy of the universe is probably zero. Now, a quantum fluctuation can exist the longer the less energy it has, because the more it borrows from the law of conservation of energy, the more quickly it has to pay it back… if the total energy of the universe is 0, the universe may be a quantum fluctuation with a beginning but no end.

Leave a Reply